Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 219

Thread: When An Anarchist Tells You to Question Authority...

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    Wrong.

    My grandson was born last year. There are currently no agencies except for the State with the authority to remove a child from a bad situation and give the child a chance at life. This is not about it could be this way next year or it could be that way in 150 years. It is not your life we are discussing here ... it is a child who was born last year who thankfully did not have to give explicit consent to the State to save his life. This is the reality of our day.
    What makes you think that without the state private entities wouldn't step into the void, as they had in the past?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    What makes you think that without the state private entities wouldn't step into the void, as they had in the past?
    The State holds implied consent for authority at birth and rightfully so, imo. Competing private entities could only have explicit consent which babies cannot give.

    Hypothetical Situation: A mother who is serving 20 years in prison gives birth to a baby. The baby cannot give consent, so the State has the authority to legally intervene on behalf of the child and find parents who can provide the youngster with a home.

    The State has the authority to kidnap the child by law.

    On what authority would competing agencies be allowed to kidnap the child even if it was in the best interests of the child?
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #153

    No Rulers But the Ones Who Say We Should Have No Rulers

    Quote Originally Posted by TortoiseDream View Post
    I think instead he would just say that not all information is true, and by questioning the information you receive (e.g. from authority figures) you can more often determine what is true and what is false.



    I'm not sure I understand your question correctly. Do you mean, equivalently: Are those who claim that one should question authority themselves free from questioning or criticism (in particular with regards to this very claim)?

    I think the answer to this question is "no", and that anyone who truly believes authority ought to be questioned would welcome criticism.
    My point is that those people, such as anarchists, who preach against having a civil government tell us what to do have no problem telling us what to do when they tell others to question authority. So, then, who are they acting like when they give such a prescription?
    "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country, for I am the LORD your God." - Leviticus 24:22

    "The main goal of the Constitution was intended to be the promotion of liberty, for all individuals equally." - Dr. Ron Paul (Ron Paul Liberty Report, 5/5/2021)

  6. #154
    Theo, you are either remarkably obtuse or remarkably dishonest.

    Damned 'Dominionists'.
    "If men are good, then they need no rulers. If men are bad, then governments of men, composed of men, will also be bad - and probably worse, due to the State's amplification of coercive power." - Ozarkia

    "Big Brother is watching. So are we." - WikiLeaks

    Laissez-nous faire, laissez-nous passer. Le monde va de lui meme.

  7. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    What makes you think that without the state private entities wouldn't step into the void, as they had in the past?
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    The State holds implied consent for authority at birth and rightfully so, imo. Competing private entities could only have explicit consent which babies cannot give.

    Hypothetical Situation: A mother who is serving 20 years in prison gives birth to a baby. The baby cannot give consent, so the State has the authority to legally intervene on behalf of the child and find parents who can provide the youngster with a home.

    The State has the authority to kidnap the child by law.

    On what authority would competing agencies be allowed to kidnap the child even if it was in the best interests of the child?

    You didn't answer my question.

  8. #156
    Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty
    What makes you think that without the state private entities wouldn't step into the void, as they had in the past?
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    You didn't answer my question.

    I did answer your question. Private entities cannot step into the void as they did in the past because they do not have the authority to kidnap people in distress. States do have that authority by law.

    Personally, I don't want private entities to have implied powers, and I am fine with representative constitutional republics having that power. I also believe that anything the State does outside of the constitution is illegitimate. States of the future can do a better job than they have in the past by amending constitutions.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  9. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    I did answer your question. Private entities cannot step into the void as they did in the past because they do not have the authority to kidnap people in distress. States do have that authority by law.

    Personally, I don't want private entities to have implied powers, and I am fine with representative constitutional republics having that power. I also believe that anything the State does outside of the constitution is illegitimate. States of the future can do a better job than they have in the past by amending constitutions.
    I just don't know how to respond to such appalling immorality. Not even the most tyrannical characters in 18th century America would think this way. This line of thought is more in line with emperors than classical republicans. It makes me sad that people in a "liberty" movement are so strongly against liberty.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  10. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    I just don't know how to respond to such appalling immorality. Not even the most tyrannical characters in 18th century America would think this way. This line of thought is more in line with emperors than classical republicans. It makes me sad that people in a "liberty" movement are so strongly against liberty.
    You mean like Ron Paul?
    I agree nearly 100% with Ron Paul.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  11. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    I did answer your question. Private entities cannot step into the void as they did in the past because they do not have the authority to kidnap people in distress. States do have that authority by law.
    Private entities can just write a law that gives themselves that authority just like the state does.

  12. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    The ONLY issue that I have found myself disagreeing with Ron Paul is explicit consent to the State if, and only if, Wesker is accurate in his interpretation of Ron Paul's position. Even then, I am not sure Wesker accurately portrayed Ron Paul in Wesker's blog entry because explicit consent is dumb and Ron Paul is not stupid.
    Maybe you didn't notice that the evidence I provided were Ron Paul's own words, right?

    That authority (of government), gained by explicit consent of the people, should be strictly limited. - Ron Paul, Liberty Defined

    In case you need to go over it again (because your memory seems foggy, or something?...) http://www.ronpaulforums.com/entry.p...Private-Courts



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    The State holds implied consent for authority at birth and rightfully so, imo.
    Who specifically gives implicit consent to the state to rule them when they're born?

    Everybody in the world?

    And how do you decide which state they imply their consent to?

  15. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Point of clarification for those who may be lurking:

    Tom Woods is a very intelligent, funny and good man who works almost exclusively on behalf of the betterment of humanity:



    He also happens to be an anarchist (please see ~ 5:00 mark. My evolution is similar to his):



    According to some, then, this makes him a selfish person.

    Good luck to those of you try to make that "logic" work in your head.

    Parenthetically, Doug Casey is great voice against the state.
    Don't forget:


  16. #163
    Another thing not to forget is exactly what institution we're talking about when we say "the state."

    What we're talking about is the one that derives its authority from the rule of law, specifically, the constitution that I am copying and pasting below in its entirety.

    The New Constitution of the Republic of Planet Earth

    Preamble.

    We the People of the Planet Earth, acting of our own volition through the means of a free republic based on the sovereignty of each individual do ordain and establish the following Constitution.

    Article I. Ratification

    This constitution shall be ratified when the legitimate representatives of each individual on planet earth unanimously vote for it to be ratified.

    The legitimate representative of every individual on planet earth is hereby delcared to be the ronpaulforums member of the handle, erowe1.

    Article II. Sovereignty

    Upon its ratification, this constitution shall be the supreme law of the land and subject to no other laws higher than itself forever.

    This Constitution delegates the responsibility of being supreme leader of planet earth to the ronpaulforums member of the handle, erowe1.

    Upon ratification of this constitution, all individuals on planet earth will have relinquished their sovereignty and the sovereignty of their posterity to the supreme leader of planet earth.


    Article III. Land Ownership

    All deeds in existence prior to the ratification of this Constitution are declared null and void upon its ratification. All real estate on planet earth, both on its land and in its waters, is henceforth to be owned by the supreme leader of the planet.

    The supreme leader is authorized to enforce the provisions of this Constitution using any force or violence that might be required.
    Edit: Just so you know, your legitimate representatives did unanimously ratify that constitution some time ago.
    Last edited by erowe1; 08-20-2011 at 01:35 PM.

  17. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post

    snip

    According to some, then, this makes him a selfish person.

    Good luck to those of you try to make that "logic" work in your head.

    snip
    It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad and disgusting.

    These are the same people who want to shove guns in our faces, steal our justly earned resources for their own benefit (so they can enjoy the warm, fuzzy ILLUSION of safety and security), and force us to abide by other silly rules that we may not agree with.

    And they have the unmitigated gall to call us "selfish."

    That kind of hypocrisy deserves to be pointed out and condemned with as much vigor as one can muster.
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  18. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    The State holds implied consent for authority at birth and rightfully so, imo. Competing private entities could only have explicit consent which babies cannot give.

    Hypothetical Situation: A mother who is serving 20 years in prison gives birth to a baby. The baby cannot give consent, so the State has the authority to legally intervene on behalf of the child and find parents who can provide the youngster with a home.

    The State has the authority to kidnap the child by law.

    On what authority would competing agencies be allowed to kidnap the child even if it was in the best interests of the child?
    On what authority would agents for a bunch of suits in a grand meeting hall be allowed to kidnap the child, even if it was in the best interests of the child?

    The State made the "law", therefore it cannot create authority that the State didn't already have.
    "You cannot solve these problems with war." - Ron Paul

  19. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentient Void View Post
    Theo, you are either remarkably obtuse or remarkably dishonest.

    Damned 'Dominionists'.
    My guess would be the latter.

    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Sentient Void again."
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  20. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    I just don't know how to respond to such appalling immorality. Not even the most tyrannical characters in 18th century America would think this way. This line of thought is more in line with emperors than classical republicans. It makes me sad that people in a "liberty" movement are so strongly against liberty.
    You might be surprised to find out how many of these there actually are.

    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to heavenlyboy34 again."
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  21. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Theocrat View Post
    My point is that those people, such as anarchists, who preach against having a civil government tell us what to do have no problem telling us what to do when they tell others to question authority. So, then, who are they acting like when they give such a prescription?
    Well, let me see now.

    On the one hand we have "civil government" in possession of armies with guns, tanks, warplanes, warships, and chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, and the ruthless willingness to use them against anyone to get their way.

    On the other hand we have an individual anarchist, lacking ANY of the above, basically making a suggestion.

    Yep, those two are EXACTLY similar. Not.

    Give me a $#@!ing break, will you?
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    I did answer your question. Private entities cannot step into the void as they did in the past because they do not have the authority to kidnap people in distress. States do have that authority by law.

    Personally, I don't want private entities to have implied powers, and I am fine with representative constitutional republics having that power. I also believe that anything the State does outside of the constitution is illegitimate. States of the future can do a better job than they have in the past by amending constitutions.
    I'm not really sure how to respond to this myself either. Just because you have a complex social problem such a child abuse does not mean that it justify's the existence of a violent group who goes around collecting plunder to help others.

    Where does this "implicit contract" to the State come from? Don't tell me that you fall under the belief that there is some 'social contract'?
    "Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces."-Étienne de La Boétie

  24. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    You might be surprised to find out how many of these there actually are.
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to heavenlyboy34 again."
    Disappointing. BTW, I accept PMs in lieu of +rep.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  25. #171
    Has the question I asked earlier ever been answered here on this forum by state advocates?

    Again:

    If anarchy is not viable because people are incapable of ruling even themselves, how does the state become viable with those same people incapable of ruling themselves now in charge of ruling others? How, when, and where does this magical transformation occur?

  26. #172

  27. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Private entities can just write a law that gives themselves that authority just like the state does.
    Which when ratified/agreed by the entities would equal a state ... you might call it something else but it is the same thing as a state nonetheless.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  28. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post
    Which when ratified/agreed by the entities would equal a state ... you might call it something else but it is the same thing as a state nonetheless.
    Correct.

    I now direct your attention to post #163.

  29. #175
    I'm so glad to see this place has grown beyond petty bickering about how many angels can sit on the head of a pin since I've been gone. It's nice to finally see everyone pulling together in a common cause.
    Follow my blog at http://tirelessagorist.blogspot.com/
    Current commentary from a libertarian/voluntaryist/agorist perspective.

    Consistent Candidate - with Chainspell

    2007
    Ron Paul Landslide by Jake Kellen - Constitution Mix

    The vision of the helpful and protective state is the most pervasive and counter-productive ideology in the world today.

  30. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by mczerone View Post
    On what authority would agents for a bunch of suits in a grand meeting hall be allowed to kidnap the child, even if it was in the best interests of the child?
    Kidnapping a child who is living in feces, starving, and thirsty is compassionate and moral if the kidnappers (under the authority of the rule of law) have the best interests of the child in mind. The child cannot give explicit consent, so the authority of the law must intervene to give the child the gift of life.
    The State made the "law", therefore it cannot create authority that the State didn't already have.
    Currently everyone who lives within the boundaries of the State gives consent to the State by living within the boundaries of the State. An opt-out feature could be included in an amendment if so desired. The State constitutions could be amended to not imprison people who do not pay taxes. The State is real today and amendments are allowed.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Correct.

    I now direct your attention to post #163.
    I saw that post. Enforce it.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  33. #178
    Mr. Woods,

    I did not intend to downplay your excellent work in your debates, videos, or books. I have personally attended more than one of your speeches and read your writings ... you are right-on for liberty. Please accept my apology if I in any way came across as negative in your behalf. Keep up your most excellent work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Travlyr View Post


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcgbNVenUTA

    Nice work Dr. Woods. You were excellent in this debate. I just wish the NPR people would have been as honest as you.
    "Everyone who believes in freedom must work diligently for sound money, fully redeemable. Nothing else is compatible with the humanitarian goals of peace and prosperity." -- Ron Paul

    Brother Jonathan

  34. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip Dru: Agorist View Post
    Has the question I asked earlier ever been answered here on this forum by state advocates?

    Again:

    If anarchy is not viable because people are incapable of ruling even themselves, how does the state become viable with those same people incapable of ruling themselves now in charge of ruling others? How, when, and where does this magical transformation occur?
    If self government is not viable because people are incapable of self governing, how does anarchy become viable with those same people incapable of ruling others, now in charge of ruling themselves?
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  35. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by Deborah K View Post
    If self government is not viable because people are incapable of self governing, how does anarchy become viable with those same people incapable of ruling others, now in charge of ruling themselves?
    Taking a purely utilitarian tack here, wouldn't it be that the net effect of those incapable of governing themselves is isolated to those very people, rather than magnifying their influence over the whole of society? Statelessness doesn't imply lawlessness. Those incapable of governing themselves do not get free reign in a stateless society - indeed, in a free society, individuals are better enabled to protect themselves from the incapable.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Who is the "Christian Anarchist" and what about the idea "Question Authority"?
    By ChristianAnarchist in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-18-2016, 04:57 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-18-2016, 12:42 AM
  3. Let's say we live in an anarchist society. BP question.
    By BoutTreeFiddy in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 07-18-2010, 02:23 PM
  4. Message and Question to all Ancaps/Anarchist/Vols/Rothbards etc from Newbitech
    By newbitech in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-31-2009, 12:09 PM
  5. question authority! (article)
    By heavenlyboy34 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-24-2009, 04:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •